Author Topic: NC: Opening of rest of I-840  (Read 456 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2708
  • Last Login:Today at 10:17:22 am
NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« on: January 05, 2023, 11:23:00 am »
Should happen right after MLK Day

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4121.msg2804183#msg2804183

I am on the side of removing I-840FutGre and replacing it with I-840 immediately even though NCDOT may be behind on signing it.

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1452
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:07:21 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2023, 04:01:32 pm »
I am on the side of removing I-840FutGre and replacing it with I-840 immediately even though NCDOT may be behind on signing it.

Agree
Clinched:

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:59:10 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2023, 08:52:58 pm »
Agreed once opened.

Offline mapmikey

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1061
  • Last Login:Today at 10:00:32 am
    • Co-curator Virginia Highways Project
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #3 on: January 07, 2023, 04:08:17 pm »
I have made the changes

Online Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2708
  • Last Login:Today at 10:17:22 am
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #4 on: January 08, 2023, 07:04:25 pm »
Not directly related, but should we go 1PPI at the I-40/I-85/I-785/I-840 interchange?

The current format has I-840 extended south of I-40/I-85 and I am not a fan of that.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:59:10 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #5 on: January 08, 2023, 11:29:24 pm »
Not directly related, but should we go 1PPI at the I-40/I-85/I-785/I-840 interchange?

The current format has I-840 extended south of I-40/I-85 and I am not a fan of that.

I'd say no to that, especially due to how all the exit numbers in that area are.

Especially since the ramps on I-85 are 0.59 miles apart there.

Offline si404

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1749
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:52:09 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2023, 06:26:25 am »
I'd say no to that, especially due to how all the exit numbers in that area are.
It's I-85 exit 131, I-40 exit 227, I-840 exit 21. One exit number per route.
Quote
Especially since the ramps on I-85 are 0.59 miles apart there.
That is about the only justification for it. The size.

I-40/I-85BL within the interchange is 0.49 mi
I-85 within the interchange is 0.59 mi
I-785/I-840 within the interchange is 0.43 mi

However, I-40/I-73 at the other side of Greensborough is pretty similar, taking up a similar length along each leg but only given one point (because there isn't a third route? was it 1 point when I-40 took the loop and I-40BL existed?).

And the example in the manual (I-97/MD3/MD32) to have as 1PPI is likewise a similar size. Lets break it down the exemplar 1PPI interchange into 3 points like the I-85 ones in Greensboro:

I-97/MD3 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.070163&lon=-76.636806
I-97/MD32 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.061716&lon=-76.639209
MD3/MD32 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.065098&lon=-76.644702

I make that 0.61 mi on I-97, 0.56 mi on MD3 and 0.38 mi on MD32. It's actually a smidge longer on the longest bit than the Greensboro examples where 3 points have been deployed (there's also the three-pointed I-73/I-85/I-85BL interchange: I-73 0.30 mi, I-85 0.58 mi, I-85BL 0.41 mi).

Offline Jim

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2532
  • Last Login:Today at 08:00:06 am
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2023, 07:31:01 am »
Am I correct that, as implemented, the only ways to travel the last segment of I-840 are to travel I-840 to I-85 South or I-85 North to I-840?  I would think travelers from I-85 South getting on I-840 would consider themselves to have traveled from that endpoint of I-840.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:59:10 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #8 on: January 09, 2023, 08:05:08 am »
I'd say no to that, especially due to how all the exit numbers in that area are.
It's I-85 exit 131, I-40 exit 227, I-840 exit 21. One exit number per route.
And the example in the manual (I-97/MD3/MD32) to have as 1PPI is likewise a similar size. Lets break it down the exemplar 1PPI interchange into 3 points like the I-85 ones in Greensboro:

Difference here is that I-40 leaves I-85 @ 131B, then has it's own separate exit @ 227.  Both MD-3 & MD-32 end @ I-97.  That's a huge difference between the two IMO.  Why should we go 1PPI here and falsely give I-85 an extra ~.5 miles that it shouldn't have?  We're properly showing where the split is currently.  I mean, if we call this a '1PPI', who's to say we need to call exits 222 & 223 on I-40 in NC an 1PPI too since it only has 0.26 between them?

As for the I-85/I-73 one, that's because I-73 doesn't technically even join with I-85, and is completely on the C/D roads on the side of I-85.

In closing, I think all interchanges like this need to be looked at fully and determined on an interchange by interchange basis instead.  Not all of them are the same, as some can easily justify an extra splitting point.

Offline rickmastfan67

  • TM Collaborator (A)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 10:59:10 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #9 on: January 09, 2023, 08:11:34 am »
Am I correct that, as implemented, the only ways to travel the last segment of I-840 are to travel I-840 to I-85 South or I-85 North to I-840?

Correct (and don't forget, it's technically signed as only I-785 right now).

I would think travelers from I-85 South getting on I-840 would consider themselves to have traveled from that endpoint of I-840.

I would, especially since all the signage at the interchange says 'TO I-40 West' on it.  So, I would need to use that segment to connect to I-40 WB.
Same goes with going the other direction.  To get to I-785/840, all signage says 'TO' from where I-40/I-85 split, which IMO, fully justifies the split 131 on I-85's file, since I-40's numbering takes over for the next exit, which is I-785/840.

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1452
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 07:07:21 pm
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #10 on: January 09, 2023, 09:01:58 am »
In closing, I think all interchanges like this need to be looked at fully and determined on an interchange by interchange basis instead.  Not all of them are the same, as some can easily justify an extra splitting point.
Clinched:

Online yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4051
  • Last Login:Today at 10:19:33 am
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #11 on: January 11, 2023, 07:47:43 pm »
^ If I were drafting that one, I'd definitely keep separate points on the W & E sides, not a big one in the middle of the whole mess. I might have one point on I-95 for both 64 & 195 to connect w/a graph connection, and add a shaping point to break the false 64/195 concurrency.
But that's just, like, my opinion, man. Not that what we have is super inappropriate. Navigating intersecting/connected routes is still easy enough, with just one more click two more clicks along a short hop on I-64. No huge loss for algorithms either IMO.

NC? I'd probably go with 1PPI there.
Full disclosure: I didn't take my own advice on the NE side of Lufkin, TX, and have periodically thought about going back & changing it...
Sri Syadasti Syadavaktavya Syadasti Syannasti Syadasti Cavaktavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavatavyasca Syadasti Syannasti Syadavaktavyasca

Offline IMGoph

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 09:37:12 am
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #12 on: January 12, 2023, 10:57:42 am »
^ If I were drafting that one, I'd definitely keep separate points on the W & E sides, not a big one in the middle of the whole mess. I might have one point on I-95 for both 64 & 195 to connect w/a graph connection, and add a shaping point to break the false 64/195 concurrency.
But that's just, like, my opinion, man. Not that what we have is super inappropriate. Navigating intersecting/connected routes is still easy enough, with just one more click two more clicks along a short hop on I-64. No huge loss for algorithms either IMO.

NC? I'd probably go with 1PPI there.
Full disclosure: I didn't take my own advice on the NE side of Lufkin, TX, and have periodically thought about going back & changing it...

For those of us who are not up with the jargon, can someone define "1PPI" please? Thank you!

Online Markkos1992

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2708
  • Last Login:Today at 10:17:22 am
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #13 on: January 12, 2023, 11:10:03 am »
1 Point Per Interchange

Offline IMGoph

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Gender: Male
  • Last Login:Today at 09:37:12 am
Re: NC: Opening of rest of I-840
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2023, 02:26:25 pm »